Hm, I think I've discovered what the downside is with the SD890: it's not wide angle. It starts out at 37 mm, as opposed to the SD880, which starts out at 28 mm. My A530 starts out at 35 mm, which is odd. I don't know what the numbers mean, but it seems that lower is better?

SD 890: 37-185mm eq.
SD 880: 28-112mm eq.
A530: 35-140mm eq.

So what does this mean exactly? The difference between the 890 and 880 is pretty significant, but would I notice a 2 mm decrease in wide angle, and is that trivial enough to justify 5x zoom? I guess the wide angle is when you zoom all the way out?

The numbers are 35mm equivalent numbers, or what the zoom is on an SLR 35mm lens. So if you divide the largest number by 35 you get the maximum zoom factor. Similarly, a smaller small number means a wider wide angle.

Oh, and I don't think you'd notice a difference between 35 and 37 at the wide angle end, but you'd definitely notice a difference with the 28 on the 880.

would I notice a 2 mm decrease in wide angle, and is that trivial enough to justify 5x zoom? I guess the wide angle is when you zoom all the way out?

I use my wide angle lens (often out to 28mm) far more than I use my zoom lens; however, if you want to zoom in at concerts, I would go for the longer zoom of the 890. Unless you are doing a lot of landscapes, it is unlikely you would notice the difference between 28 and 37.

Oh, thanks. Well, doing the math on that, it looks like the 37/35 difference is fairly trivial, whereas the 37/28 and 185/112 differences are quite significant. In fact, it seems like the "4x" for the A530 is truly 4x, whereas it's 3.2x on the SD880. Which means I would feel like I could zoom in less because I would be starting out so much wider, right? So, going from the A530 to the SD890, I wouldn't notice too much how wide I could go but I would notice I could zoom in much more, whereas I would have the opposite experience going to the SD880. But since my major complaint is not being able to zoom...I should go with the SD890 (since I rarely feel like my angle isn't wide enough). Is all that reasoning sound? Am I thinking about this right?

Oh, and I don't think you'd notice a difference between 35 and 37 at the wide angle end, but you'd definitely notice a difference with the 28 on the 880.

Just as I thought!

I use my wide angle lens (often out to 28mm) far more than I use my zoom lens; however, if you want to zoom in at concerts, I would go for the longer zoom of the 890. Unless you are doing a lot of landscapes, it is unlikely you would notice the difference between 28 and 37.

Yeah, I don't do a lot of landscapes. Any wide shots I've ever done with my A530, I was pretty satisfied with how wide I got.

Thanks for all the help and advice, guys! I think the SD890 looks like the best bet, and a good deal. Just over $200 for a $350 camera!

Yeah, depends how close you are to the stage at the con. If you're pretty close, and you want to get a shot of the whole panel, you may be happier with a lens that's got a wider angle option. If you tend to be further back, you'll be happier with a bigger zoom.

t on edit Wow! I wrote this before P-Cow's previous post, but it makes total sense following it. Wacky!

If you're pretty close, and you want to get a shot of the whole panel, you may be happier with a lens that's got a wider angle option.

Ha! Now that I think about it, that is one of the few times I've ever wished for a little wider. But I am more irritated that even though I am sitting in the front row, I can't zoom in on their damn faces.

If it helps, 50mm is the standard "what your eye sees" lens. Numbers lower than that widen the picture out; numbers higher than that narrow in on something.

Oooh! Thanks, that does help me understand the numbers more.

Also, that explains why the camera sees more than I do. I was always freaked out and confused by that.

Keep in mind that all of the 50mm standards are based on 35mm film. The image sensor on digital cameras is quite a bit smaller which screws with all of the math. It's part of the reason the really high end digital SLR cameras jump in price so much, they use a full size CCD inside which means the lenses actually perform as expected.

I think I'm drawn to the SD890 because of the 5x zoom.

Keep in mind that if you get a camera that is high megapixel (I'd say 8 MP or above) you can crop and zoom after the fact and actually get excellent results. The optics on the extremely small zoom systems in most of these compact cameras leaves a lot to be desired. I'd go for one with less of a zoom but better quality shots and with a 10 MP resolution and just shoot the extra area in the field and then crop and zoom when I got the footage home.